Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Rachel Maddow trashes Obama for shredding Constitution! Must watch!

page: 1
59
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+43 more 
posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   
First of all....



The oath of office of the President of the United States is an oath or affirmation required by the United States Constitution before the President begins the execution of the office. The wording is specified in Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

en.wikipedia.org...


I've gotta say...I'm surprised to see this. I'm starting to like this woman a bit. She always gives Ron Paul, of whom I'm a big supporter, the utmost respect when on her show.

I think Ron Paul is starting to rub off on her some.

As she states in this clip...Obama is stating that he'll keep people in detention because they MIGHT commit crimes in the future.

Watch this! This is on MSNBC...the Obama network to boot!

Kudos to Rachel for looking out for the Constitution on this one!!
Watch as Obama declares that he can HOLD SOMEONE INDEFINITELY WITHOUT TRIAL! I didn't see this speech when it aired...how did this get by everyone? This is the first I've heard of this.


Obama is NOT change...no matter how much you want it.


edit title/added quote and link

[edit on 23-5-2009 by David9176]




posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Rachel Maddow is starting to criticize Obama now?

I might start watching her again... she was a pretty adamant critic of the Bush administration... if she starts criticizing Obama more frequently and acts less like a bot like she did during the election...

I'll watch the video later.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Frankidealist35
 


She hammers him pretty good in this one and show's his blatant hypocrisy in the entire matter of how he would go about holding detainees.

Crazy.


+15 more 
posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Now just imagine for a moment that you were wrongly accused of being a terrorist and were detained by a government agency under the PATRIOT ACT.

Well now you can be held indefinitely WITHOUT TRIAL.

Don't you guys see the implications of this?

It doesn't matter who it's intended for...this is opening up an entire new can of worms.

If you are worried about individual rights and our Constitution...this should open your eyes...regardless of party affiliation.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Good find and thanks for the vid. I would not have seen it, otherwise. I only watched her show, once, and felt she seemed a little elitest. While I still don't like her smug delivery, I will retract my original opinion and watch again.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I have listened to her for years -
I have also listened to the other side(s) for years.
I like to hear all sides.


This is brilliant -
Good for her.
We need this kind of commentary -




[edit on 23-5-2009 by spinkyboo]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
As she states in that clip and Obama is stating that he willll keep people in detention because they might commit crimes in the future? that seems like a big thing on every residents...



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Like I stated in another thread:


Well, people on the nightly news are talking about it. I find that sort of worrisome. I'm glad to see people defending constitutional rights but if this is some NWO plot, why is the media talking about it? Why is the president? Are they trying to prepare us for what is to come?

I think they are getting this subject out in the open now, and then will probably plan another 9/11 style attack, but this time homegrown terrorist will be at fault, justifying the need for preventive detention.


I'm glad that Maddow brought this to people's attention, but Obama never actually used the preventive detention term and the media has already whipped it out and began hammering it over our heads. Reminds me of when "terrorist" and "enemy combatant" started being said on the news, like, every ten seconds.

[edit on 23-5-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Wow, and it only took four months for find the first liberal to realized that the new boss is the same as the ol' boss.

This is exactly the kind of fascist stuff I was bitchen and moaning about for 8 years under Bush. He criticizes Bush as a front when he is just pushing the exact same agenda in the War on Terror, the Bailouts, the wiretaping, etc...

And where his is a departure from Bush, it is for the worse. Raising taxes, pandering to the UAW, Forced volunteerism, etc...

We are on a one way path towards fascism. When will the rest of the Obamamaniacs wake up?



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


I agree. This is the first I've heard on this though. What worries me even more is all the "domestic terrorist" stuff flying around lately.

Is it possible for them to use this on American citizens and completely trounce on pretty much all of their legal rights?



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
And the doped up millions will simper, "Oh, geez. I hope someone will do something," and then change the channel to watch whatever their favorite flavor of pablum might be.

Yes, it's worrisome that the MSM is talking about it - but maybe they are reaching the end of their willingness to kowtow to the PTB...? One may hope.

But yes. Another false flag is on its way. No other reason for this unless the MSM is gaining a conscience.

If this does not rile us up (as it has me), we will be led to the slaughter with ease.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Well what's even more crazy is that one of Obama's economic advisors is the CEO of GE...which owns NBC and MSNBC which explains the usual railing for Obama because of GE's green agenda.

Amazing really and i'm not quite sure what to make of it....but I"m glad she did this piece regardless.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


I agree. This is the first I've heard on this though. What worries me even more is all the "domestic terrorist" stuff flying around lately.

Is it possible for them to use this on American citizens and completely trounce on pretty much all of their legal rights?



Yes and homegrown terrorist is being said a lot as well.

It's definitely possible. The Patriot Act trumps the Bill of Rights, but they got away with that. This time we need to really step up and watch them like hawks. Even if there is a planned, homegrown terrorist attack, we can not allow them to get away with preventive detention.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:53 AM
link   
This is nuts!

I can't believe that in the short time i've followed politics how completely jacked up the entire thing is.

And even with all of this going on...we still leave our borders open for "terrorists" to skip across the border. Our jobs are still leaving the country and we are going broke funding huge government spending and wars, our rights are completely thrashed by a 2 party system that doesn't give a damn about us and our individual rights.

CRIPES!



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Wow. I'm not american but wow.
wow.

threepeat!

..."who have not been convicted in the past because of tainted evidence.."
Who's proving the evidence is tainted? Who's taking responsibility for the tainting? So many questions. No satisfactory answers ever.
good luck ya'll!!! gulp.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
As I stated in the other thread where this video showed up…

Since when is it illegal to hold people who have not committed a crime yet, but are plotting to commit a crime?


In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect.


These news reporters should be required to take a class in law before they are put on the air to voice their personal opinions.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
As I stated in the other thread where this video showed up…

Since when is it illegal to hold people who have not committed a crime yet, but are plotting to commit a crime?


In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect.


These news reporters should be required to take a class in law before they are put on the air to voice their personal opinions.


The issue here is that "innocent until proven guilty" and "the right to a fair trial," as well as habeas corpus and all the other concepts of this ilk are being thrown out the _ Isn't that what America is about?

Add to that the issue of defining "terrorist." As it stands now, those who would support the Constitution are being set up to be called "terrorists."

Sure, it would seem that this is just for people from other countries who might blow something up or such, but the slippery slope is open for business if we even consider that this is in any way acceptabe and "American."



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Most excellent video, s&F

If this gets through shouldn't the first thing to do be wrapping up ALL corrupted politicians including this and former presidents, since they are the biggest threat to HS?



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Since when is it illegal to hold people who have not committed a crime yet, but are plotting to commit a crime?

But preventive detention requires no evidence that you were intending to commit a crime.


Preventive detention concerns imprisonment either without justification (the prisoner is not told the grounds for the arrest) or waiting for trial.

In most democracies, no one can be arrested without being told the grounds for such an arrest, except under rare and special circumstances (usually anti-terrorism legislation). An arrested citizen has to be brought before the nearest magistrate within a certain amount of time. The arrested person has the right to defend himself by a lawyer of his choice. Depending on the laws, this lawyer can be called for as soon as the detention starts, or sometimes days or weeks later.

However, there is an exception to this general provision. Under preventive detention, the government can imprison a person for some time. It means that if the government feels that a person being at liberty can be a threat to the law and order or the unity and integrity of the nation, it can detain or arrest that person to prevent him from doing this possible harm.

(Emphasis Mine)
en.wikipedia.org...



[edit on 23-5-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Well, Liberals are not stupid. I am one, and i think Obama is the "Closer"
for the NWO, the one who makes everything happen for them.
Its great to see a Lib on tv WAKING UP and realizing what the game is all about.
I hope others will follow suit and that remains to be seen. Rachel may change her tune if her job suddenly is at stake.
we will see.





new topics

top topics



 
59
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution